Mumbai Court February 2004 Judgments

Deepak Desai (Samarth Shipping Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The applications for waiver of predeposit of penalty arise out of the order of the Commissioner of Customs Mumbai. The case of the department is that M/s. New Choice has over valued export of readymade garments resulting in inadmissible claim of excess draw back. The case of the department is based interalia on statement of the concerned persons including the statement of the son of the proprietor of the exporting firm M/s. New Choice.2. It is submitted by Ld. Counsel for the exporting firm and son of export firms proprietor that there is no mis-declaration, and therefore penalty under Section 114 is not sustainable. As regards the proprietor of the CHA, his counsel submits that the evidence on record clearly brings out keeping away of CHA due to his illness and that one Sudhir Bhosle had misused the CHA paper such as Kardex number and actually forged his signature and therefore penalty on Deepak Desai under Section 114 which has been imposed on the ground of omission/negligence is...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. White Cliff Tea and Hindustan

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(168)ELT413Tri(Mum.)bai

1. These two appeals from the revenue deal with common grounds hence are decided together. However, for the sake of illustration the facts are extracted from E/3829/01-Mum.The revenue's instant appeal is directed against the order-in-appeal whereby the refund claim of the respondents viz. M/s Hindustan lever limited, which the original authority rejected as time barred was allowed by Commissioner (Appeals). The respondent's contention that, the refund could not be held as time barred for the reason that, the assessment was provisional and the claim was within the stipulated limitation from the date of finalisation of the assessment was rejected by the Assistant Commissioner, whereas this plea was accepted by the Commissioner (Appeals). Hence the present appeal from the revenue.2.1 Admissibility of the claim is not disputed and hence the merits of claim need not be discussed.2.2 The respondents have pleaded that, they have complied with the provisions contained in Rule 9 B of the Centr...

Siddhi Vinayak Steel, Jasraj G. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(166)ELT324Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Vide his impugned Order, the Commissioner of Customs (Imports), Mumbai, has confiscated the Stainless Steel Coils & Sheets totally valued at Rs. 19.64 lakh(Rupees nineteen lakh sixty-four thousand) approximately, with an option to the appellants to redeem the same on payment of a redemption fine of Rs. 2.15 lakh(Rupees two lakh fifteen thousand) on the finding that the same were of smuggled nature. In addition, the duty of Rs. 13,17,733.00(Rupees thirteen lakh seventeen thousand seven hundred and thirty-three) has been confirmed against the appellants in respect of the said goods, along with the imposition of personal penalty of Rs. 1.00 lakh (Rupees one lakh) on the main, appellant company, M/s. Siddhivinayak Steel. Personal penalty of Rs. 25,000.00 (Rupees twenty-five thousand) has been imposed upon Shri Manilal Shah and that of Rs. 15,000.00 (Rupees fifteen thousand) upon Shri Jasraj G. Mehta.2. As per narration of facts in the impugned Order, the Department received an info...

Prakash Textiles (Guj.) Ltd. Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(95)ECC246

1. Heard the DR. The appellants have furnished written submissions.They are not present.2. The dispute in the appeal relates to the benefit of deemed credit in terms of provisions contained in Notification No. 29/96 Central Excise (NT) to the appellants. The appellants received grey fabrics and after subjecting them to certain processes, cleared the same to the job workers and thereafter received such fabrics processed by the job workers in their factory. Such processed fabrics were finally cleared by the appellants from their factory on payment of appropriate duty thereon after availing the facility of deemed credit, at the point of the final clearance. In other words the facility of deemed credit was not utilised at the point of the first clearance of partially processed fabrics to the job workers. The issue is whether the appellants were correct. Lower authorities decided the matter against the appellants, hence the instant appeal to the Tribunal.3. On going through the provisions ...

Decron Synthetics (P) Ltd., Emtee Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The instant 3 appeals are directed against a common order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals). Hence these are heard together and are being disposed of through a common order.2. In the impugned order, it is observed that, there is no dispute regarding shortage of quantity of 3609.220 Kgs of Polyester Texturised Yarn vis-a-vis the quantity recorded in the RGI register, as brought out in the Panchnama dated 8.1.1996. Duty demand of Rs. 1,84,702/- confirmed against M/s Emtee Poly Yarn has been accepted and is not disputed. In the instant appeal the appellants M/s Emtee Poly Yarn and Shri C.T. Jain are only contesting the penalty of Rs. 1,88,702 imposed under Rule 173Q read with Section 11AC, on M/s Emtee Poly Yam and Rs. 25,000/- imposed on Shri Jain. Similarly penalty of Rs. 5,000/- imposed on M/s Decron Synthetics under Rule 209 A is also contested.4. The learned counsel pleads that, since the duty has been voluntarily paid penalty may be waived. The Ld....

Shree Sai Krupa Dye and Printing Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The issue raised in the instant appeal from the revenue relates to powers of confiscation and imposition of penalty in cases involving evasion of additional Excise duty (in lieu of Sales Tax) in terms of provisions contained in Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957. The Commissioner (Appeals) following the ratio of the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of M/s.Pioneer Silk Mills reported in 1995 (80) ELT 507 (Delhi) held that, provisions relating to confiscation and penalty in Central Excise Act, 1944 are not applicable to additional duties of excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act 1957. Accordingly, he set aside the orders of confiscation and imposition of penalty, passed by the adjudicating authority. The revenue appeal challenges the said findings.2. In the revenue appeal it is claimed that, on reference to the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Ujagar Prints Vs.UOI reported in 1988 (38) ELT 535 (SC), it can...

Vaishnav Shorilal Puri and ors. and Seaworld Shipping and Logistics P. ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2004]120CompCas681(Bom); [2004]53SCL469(Bom)

A.M. Khanwilkar, J. 1. These four appeals can be disposed of by common judgment, as they are between the same parties and are directed against the common judgment and order passed by the Company Law Board, Principal Bench, New Delhi, dated October 29, 2003, in Company Petitions Nos. 40 and 41 of 2002, since reported in Kishore Kundan Sippy v. Samrat Shipping and Transport Systems P. Ltd. [2004] 118 Comp Cas 472.2. These appeals pertain to Samrat Shipping Co. Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the SSCO') and Samrat Shipping and Transport Systems Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the SSTS'). Both these companies are controlled jointly by two groups. For the sake of convenience, we shall refer to those groups as the Puri group and the Sippy group. Both the above numbered company petitions under Sections 397, 398, 399, 402 and 406 of the Companies Act, 1956, were filed by Sippy group. Company Petition No. 40 of 2002 Was filed in respect of SSCO for the following substantive relief...

Bhaurao S/O Motiram Selokar and anr. Vs. the Executive Engineer, Bhand ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(2)ALLMR873; (2004)106BOMLR914

S.T. Kharche, J.1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith and heard finally with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties.2. The learned Counsel for the petitioners contended that the petitioners were employed as labour by the respondents in the year 1980 at Rawanwadi tank and continued in service without any break till their termination. The termination was challenged before the Labour Court. The Labour Court dismissed the complaint on the ground that the petitioners did not complete continuous service of 240 days in a year preceding to their termination. Aggrieved by this order, the petitioners filed a Revision before the Industrial Court which came to be dismissed on 26.9.2002.3. The learned Counsel for the petitioners further contended that the respondents are in the custody of the records and onus was on them to prove that the petitioners did not work for continuous period of 240 days in a year. He contended that even an application for taking inspection of the records ...

Prakash S/O Deochandia Popat Vs. Smt. Shalini Wd/O Damodhar Shivaniwar

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(3)ALLMR74; (2004)106BOMLR92

S.T. Kharche, J.1. The short question that arises for consideration in this petition is whether the petitioner/tenant was in arrears of rent on the date of filing of the application for the period of six months and whether the tenant is habitually in arrears of rent within the meaning of Clause 13(3)(i) and Clause 13(3)(ii) of the C.P. and Berar Letting of Premises and Rent Control Order, 1949 (for short the Rent Control Order).2. Relevant facts are as under :The respondent is the owner of the premises in which the petitioner has been inducted as a tenant by virtue of the agreement dated 13.1.1984. The tenant had agreed to pay the rent of Rs. 350/- per month which was subsequently enhanced to Rs, 360/- per month by virtue of the second agreement dated 1.2.1985. The tenant was irregular in payment of rent, the details of which are as under :_______________________________________________________________________Year Period Amount___________________________________________________________...

Anjani International and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(95)ECC551

1. Pursuant to specific information that exporters of bed linen items, etc., made out of 100% cotton were misusing the Pass Book Scheme by mis-declaration by opting for a generic norm (instead of specific name) for availing higher credit the officers of Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI), Mumbai initiated investigations into such exports made by various exporters as stated above. During the course of investigations, further intelligence was also received inter alia indicating that the exporters had also mi-declared the input items used as 'processed cotton fabrics' even though they had acquired grey cotton fabrics as inputs and manufactured export products there from.Consequently the statements of the exporters were recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 in which they stated that they had applied for and obtained Pass Books. They also submitted documents pertaining to purchase of grey cotton fabrics, job working of such grey cotton fabrics into processed fabrics, c...